Bug#984063: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
On Saturday, January 22, 2022 12:15:25 P.M. CST Étienne Mollier wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > Andreas Tille, on 2022-01-16: > > I think the roadmap that ITK4 will be deleted as soon as possible > > is clear. However, if it might serve as an intermediate means > > to support some remaining dependencies temporarily I think it > > is OK to do some tricks that would not be acceptable as long > > term means. > > I have been working on a rewrap of insighttoolkit4 to include > the embedded tiff library, and with all the previous patching to > address the initial issue described in this bug, the build went > through. The package should be in shape for upload tomorrow. Neat! I'm sure that those using ITK 4 will appreciate your work. As far as the existing Salsa repository is concerned: I would encourage you to consider using a v4 branch to maintain it. If you prefer to do something else, that is also fine with me. Just want to be clear that I haven't any objection to keeping v4 and v5 in a single repository. -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#984063: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
Thanks a lot! Am Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 07:15:25PM +0100 schrieb Étienne Mollier: > Hi Andreas, > > Andreas Tille, on 2022-01-16: > > I think the roadmap that ITK4 will be deleted as soon as possible > > is clear. However, if it might serve as an intermediate means > > to support some remaining dependencies temporarily I think it > > is OK to do some tricks that would not be acceptable as long > > term means. > > I have been working on a rewrap of insighttoolkit4 to include > the embedded tiff library, and with all the previous patching to > address the initial issue described in this bug, the build went > through. The package should be in shape for upload tomorrow. > > Have a nice day, :) > -- > Étienne Mollier > Fingerprint: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da > Sent from /dev/pts/6, please excuse my verbosity. > On air: Lemur Voice - Solilocide -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
Am Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 11:51:43AM +0100 schrieb Étienne Mollier: > At some point I tried investigating how to reproduce the tiff > test failure with minimum requirements, to determine whether the > problem comes from the way itk4 calls the library, or if the > library itself is at fault, but I must admit I didn't manage to > get very far on that front given the intricaties of the test > system. > > At this point, we don't have the cycles to maintain an itk4 > legacy library for more Debian releases. However, in case itk4 > were really needed, an option which does not involve sacrificing > some test results could be to reinject the embedded code copy of > tiff 4.0.3 in itk4, ... or alternatively drop that specific test, > and adjust d/rules to not use the operating > system tiff library. This could work. The drawback is that it > makes it problematic to maintain security wise, when issues must > be corrected in the tiff library, but I don't see other simple > options. I think the roadmap that ITK4 will be deleted as soon as possible is clear. However, if it might serve as an intermediate means to support some remaining dependencies temporarily I think it is OK to do some tricks that would not be acceptable as long term means. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
Am Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 07:07:01AM +0100 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: > On 1/15/22 21:45, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > There is no RM bug for insighttoolkit4 yet, > > > > Steve simply bumped the version right in d/changelog[1] > > How does the insighttoolkit5 package in unstable cause the removal of > insighttoolkit4? It does not. However, from simply using the same repository you can draw the conclusion that there is no intention to maintain two different versions. Well, for sure we could use another branch - but Steve in some mail on Debian Med list stated he has no intention to maintain more than one version. > > IMHO it would be sad to loose OTB. When I once started looking at the > > packaging upstream was quite responsive. Did you discussed the issue? > > I did, see the comments in the MR linked above. OTB 9 should support ITK5, > but is not expected until the end of the year. Thanks for the information. I'm absolutely not in a hurry to file RM requests for insighttoolkit4 and I think it is not sensible to remove OTB just to reinject it later and waiting in new for a couple of months. So we can simply leave the situation as is if you ask me. In case you might stumble upon a patch for insighttoolkit4 to build with recent gcc and there are good reasons to keep this and current otb in testing I'd volunteer to upload a fix for insighttoolkit4 (which I would not touch personally otherwise). Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
On 1/15/22 21:45, Andreas Tille wrote: Hi Bas, Am Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 08:30:26PM +0100 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: Insighttoolkit4 will be removed from Debian. We are now building insighttoolkit5 and do not support insighttoolkit4 any more. Good to know. OTB won't support ITK5 for quite a while, though: https://gitlab.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeotoolbox/otb/-/merge_requests/528 Removing itk4 will be difficult with rdeps still depending on it. There is no RM bug for insighttoolkit4 yet, Steve simply bumped the version right in d/changelog[1] How does the insighttoolkit5 package in unstable cause the removal of insighttoolkit4? when you file one feel free to file one for otb as well and have it block the one for itk4, but please CC pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org when you do. IMHO it would be sad to loose OTB. When I once started looking at the packaging upstream was quite responsive. Did you discussed the issue? I did, see the comments in the MR linked above. OTB 9 should support ITK5, but is not expected until the end of the year. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
Hi Bas, Am Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 08:30:26PM +0100 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: > > Insighttoolkit4 will be removed from Debian. We are now building > > insighttoolkit5 and do not support insighttoolkit4 any more. > > Good to know. > > OTB won't support ITK5 for quite a while, though: > > https://gitlab.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeotoolbox/otb/-/merge_requests/528 > > Removing itk4 will be difficult with rdeps still depending on it. > > There is no RM bug for insighttoolkit4 yet, Steve simply bumped the version right in d/changelog[1] > when you file one feel free to > file one for otb as well and have it block the one for itk4, but please CC > pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org when you do. IMHO it would be sad to loose OTB. When I once started looking at the packaging upstream was quite responsive. Did you discussed the issue? Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/insighttoolkit/-/blob/master/debian/changelog -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
On 1/15/22 20:11, Andreas Tille wrote: Am Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 06:45:11PM +0100 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 16:58:42 +0100 Andreas Tille wrote: This bug has been fixed in the meantime. insighttoolkit4 still FTBFS with GCC 11: error: ISO C++17 does not allow dynamic exception specifications The same error as in the original buildlog. Insighttoolkit4 will be removed from Debian. We are now building insighttoolkit5 and do not support insighttoolkit4 any more. Good to know. OTB won't support ITK5 for quite a while, though: https://gitlab.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeotoolbox/otb/-/merge_requests/528 Removing itk4 will be difficult with rdeps still depending on it. There is no RM bug for insighttoolkit4 yet, when you file one feel free to file one for otb as well and have it block the one for itk4, but please CC pkg-grass-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org when you do. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
Am Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 06:45:11PM +0100 schrieb Sebastiaan Couwenberg: > reopen -1 > > On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 16:58:42 +0100 Andreas Tille wrote: > > > > This bug has been fixed in the meantime. > > insighttoolkit4 still FTBFS with GCC 11: > > error: ISO C++17 does not allow dynamic exception specifications > > The same error as in the original buildlog. Insighttoolkit4 will be removed from Debian. We are now building insighttoolkit5 and do not support insighttoolkit4 any more. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
reopen -1 On Mon, 10 Jan 2022 16:58:42 +0100 Andreas Tille wrote: Am Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 05:25:59PM +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk: > On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 04:02:09PM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > About the build error I caught with itk4 on , this > > looks to be caused by a gcc bug in the headers files [1], > > causing failures to build source code including with > > clang, compiler which is in use through castxml, which in turn > > is used for constructing the wrapper ITKCommonBase. itk5 dsc is > > not affected as wrappers are not built anymore on its side, so > > disabling wrappers for itk4 too might be a viable option while > > #1000398 is being worked on (to at least reproduce the tiff test > > failures). The build error may otherwise solve by itself with > > an upcoming gcc version. > > > > [1]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1000398 > >... > > This bug has been fixed in the meantime. insighttoolkit4 still FTBFS with GCC 11: error: ISO C++17 does not allow dynamic exception specifications The same error as in the original buildlog. Kind Regards, Bas -- GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
Bug#984063: Closing bug (Was: Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063))
Am Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 05:25:59PM +0200 schrieb Adrian Bunk: > On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 04:02:09PM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > About the build error I caught with itk4 on , this > > looks to be caused by a gcc bug in the headers files [1], > > causing failures to build source code including with > > clang, compiler which is in use through castxml, which in turn > > is used for constructing the wrapper ITKCommonBase. itk5 dsc is > > not affected as wrappers are not built anymore on its side, so > > disabling wrappers for itk4 too might be a viable option while > > #1000398 is being worked on (to at least reproduce the tiff test > > failures). The build error may otherwise solve by itself with > > an upcoming gcc version. > > > > [1]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1000398 > >... > > This bug has been fixed in the meantime. > > > Kind Regards, > > cu > Adrian > > -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063)
On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 04:02:09PM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > Hi there, > > About the build error I caught with itk4 on , this > looks to be caused by a gcc bug in the headers files [1], > causing failures to build source code including with > clang, compiler which is in use through castxml, which in turn > is used for constructing the wrapper ITKCommonBase. itk5 dsc is > not affected as wrappers are not built anymore on its side, so > disabling wrappers for itk4 too might be a viable option while > #1000398 is being worked on (to at least reproduce the tiff test > failures). The build error may otherwise solve by itself with > an upcoming gcc version. > > [1]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1000398 >... This bug has been fixed in the meantime. > Kind Regards, cu Adrian
Bug#984063: itk libtiff test issues (Was: Bug#984063)
On Saturday, December 11, 2021 3:02:02 A.M. CST Étienne Mollier wrote: > I considered pushing a change yesterday to disable those tests > on insighttoolkit4, Let's please agree to NEVER do that. > not to hide dust under the carpet, but to > give a chance to reverse dependencies to make it to testing in a > decent enough shape hopefuly. I appreciate the sentiment, but medical & scientific software -- probably the only consumers of ITK -- is generally the sort that you never want to knowingly ship with failed tests. -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#984063: [Debian-med-packaging] Bug#984063: Please lets coordinate itk4/itk5 issues (Was: Bug#984063)
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 11:34:13PM +0100, Étienne Mollier wrote: > Étienne Mollier, on 2021-11-08: > > I haven't pushed investigations further for the moment. This > > possibly appeared with tiff 4.3.0, and probably got fixed in > > ITKv5 as well. > > Or not, the embedded copy is still libtiff 4.0.3 in ITKv5 > instead of the version 4.3.0. Maybe something went wrong with > our system tiff library, or the way it is called needs change; > it's probably worth pinging upstream. >... ITKv5 appears to build, how was it fixed there? The other problem is #984284, which seems to require a rename of the libinsighttoolkit4.13 package. > In hope this helps, > Kind Regards, cu Adrian
Bug#995829: Please lets coordinate itk4/itk5 issues (Was: Bug#984063)
On Monday, November 8, 2021 1:09:43 A.M. CST Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > this mail from Jose > > Am Sat, Nov 06, 2021 at 01:33:29AM +0100 schrieb Jose Luis Rivero: > > Hello! Gazebo maintainer here, affected by this RC bug. Looking into > > upstream repository there is a potential commit that can be used to patch > > this problem until new versions land in Debian: > > > > https://github.com/InsightSoftwareConsortium/ITK/commit/840f22feb351739359 > > a8fdb55304124823a3a8c9 Are you saying this will allow ITKv4 to be built with current gcc? At present, ITK is about to be removed from testing tomorrow because it won't build. > caused me having a look into the Git repository of insighttoolkit4[1]. > It is missing the NMU 4.13.3withdata-dfsg1-4.1 by Andreas Beckmann and > there are now the first commits done by Steve for insighttoolkit5 > version 5.2.1 which was ITPed by Ghislain[2]. Yep, I've already uploaded ITK 5 to Debian. https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/insighttoolkit5_5.2.1-1.html > I think we need to discuss whether > > 1. We want to simply replace insighttoolkit4 (which makes the > usage of the existing repository[1] sensible - but please inject > the NMU changes at least in d/changelog Yes. This is what I've communicated already 2-3 times on the list -- going back a year -- and in Ghislain's ITP. https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2020/11/msg00212.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2021/10/msg00149.html https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=995829#10 > 2. We should start ITK5 in a new repository and maintain both > versions at least for some time in parallel until all packages > that currently use ITK4 are migrated. If we can get ITK4 to build with current compilers, my suggestion would be to make a v4 branch in the current repository. On the other hand, it's kind of 11th hour here. I'm much more focused on replacing v4 with v5 -- which, to be fair is already more than two years old. ITK v4 is no longer supported upstream. > In any case people who are interested in ITK should coordinate their > work and talk to each other which I'd like to kindly invite you to > do here on the Debian Med mailing list (any other channel is fine for > sure). Yes, I've always used debian-med for communications. Additional hands are always welcomed. -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#984063: Please lets coordinate itk4/itk5 issues (Was: Bug#984063)
Hi, this mail from Jose Am Sat, Nov 06, 2021 at 01:33:29AM +0100 schrieb Jose Luis Rivero: > Hello! Gazebo maintainer here, affected by this RC bug. Looking into > upstream repository there is a potential commit that can be used to patch > this problem until new versions land in Debian: > > https://github.com/InsightSoftwareConsortium/ITK/commit/840f22feb351739359a8fdb55304124823a3a8c9 caused me having a look into the Git repository of insighttoolkit4[1]. It is missing the NMU 4.13.3withdata-dfsg1-4.1 by Andreas Beckmann and there are now the first commits done by Steve for insighttoolkit5 version 5.2.1 which was ITPed by Ghislain[2]. I think we need to discuss whether 1. We want to simply replace insighttoolkit4 (which makes the usage of the existing repository[1] sensible - but please inject the NMU changes at least in d/changelog 2. We should start ITK5 in a new repository and maintain both versions at least for some time in parallel until all packages that currently use ITK4 are migrated. In any case people who are interested in ITK should coordinate their work and talk to each other which I'd like to kindly invite you to do here on the Debian Med mailing list (any other channel is fine for sure). > Let me know if you need more help or assistance. Every assistance is welcome. BTW, I tried to apply the mentioned patch to insighttoolkit4 4.13.3withdata-dfsg1-4.1 but it does not apply. I did not investigated why since I think some things should be clarified first. Kind regards Andreas. [1] https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/insighttoolkit [2] https://bugs.debian.org/995829 -- http://fam-tille.de
Bug#984063:
Hello! Gazebo maintainer here, affected by this RC bug. Looking into upstream repository there is a potential commit that can be used to patch this problem until new versions land in Debian: https://github.com/InsightSoftwareConsortium/ITK/commit/840f22feb351739359a8fdb55304124823a3a8c9 Let me know if you need more help or assistance. Thanks!
